At some point, the particularly dumb right-wingers became “wingnuts” to us on the left, and their equivalents on the left were dubbed “moonbats” by the right. What’s the right term for particularly dumb IDCers? IDiots is to close to the mark. Something that contrasts their desire for egghead status with the fact they seem to have been dropped on their heads. Too bad “cracked-heads” is a little too close to accusing them of a particularly illegal activity.
That’s a call for submissions. The winner gets something or other, possibly of value. (Anyone who wants to donate something of value for the winner, can.)
This is all inspired by Billy Dembski’s latest prognistication, given the new Pope. Sometimes I wonder if the entire IDC movement’s brain trust didn’t think IDC up while really drunk, and now they have to keep at it, acting crazier and crazier until the milk spurts out their noses. Dembski is elated to note that:
Unlike John Paul II, who seemed to sign off on conventional evolutionary theory save for the divine infusion of souls at the origin of humanity (a claim without empirical content given the way John Paul II developed it), we can expect Benedict XVI to single out intelligent design for special favors. Indeed, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Michael Behe invited to an audience with the new pope. …
I’m predicting that Bush and Benedict XVI will play much the same role in the distintegration of evolution (i.e., the ateleological materialistic form of it that currently dominates the West) as Reagan and John Paul II did in the disintegration of communism.
(The italicized section is on the ID the F version, but not the one on Dembski’s blog.)
A political leader and a Grand Inquisitor persecuting scientists for “ateleological materialism”? Sound familiar?
Cracked! (If I had a pithy name, I’d write it here with a sense of snide sarcasm.)
And let’s also list the ways in which communism and science are similar.
Then let’s list the ways in which any natural science is teleological or non-materialistic.
Man that was easy.
Making a joke about the irony of an IDCer critiquing the empirical content of religious claims is left as an exercise for the reader.